Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Problematic formatting of perflog headers when using perflog_compat #3163

Open
teojgo opened this issue Apr 24, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #3201
Open

Problematic formatting of perflog headers when using perflog_compat #3163

teojgo opened this issue Apr 24, 2024 · 3 comments · Fixed by #3201

Comments

@teojgo
Copy link
Contributor

teojgo commented Apr 24, 2024

For example for the perflog header based on format: https://github.com/eth-cscs/cscs-reframe-tests/blob/dea38f67cd1c5ff9d80f7dbd785854733433d86d/config/common.py#L54

A final header looks as follows:
job_completion_time|version|info|jobid|num_tasks|perf_var=perf_value|perf_ref perf_lower_thres,perf_upper_thres)perf_unit

@vkarak
Copy link
Contributor

vkarak commented Apr 24, 2024

Oh yeah, I've come across it and have noted it down to open an issue about.

@vkarak
Copy link
Contributor

vkarak commented Apr 24, 2024

This happens when you use the perflog_compat only.

@vkarak vkarak changed the title Problematic formatting of perflog headers Problematic formatting of perflog headers when using perflog_compat Apr 24, 2024
@vkarak vkarak added this to the ReFrame 4.7 milestone Apr 24, 2024
@vkarak
Copy link
Contributor

vkarak commented May 14, 2024

I think the header generator gets confused from the spaces and the parenthesis in the format. Here is the regex used:

self.__attr_patt = re.compile(r'\%\((.*?)\)s(.)?')

And here the groups extracted:

for m in self.__attr_patt.finditer(fmt):
attr = m.group(1)
delim = m.group(2)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
Status: Merge To Develop
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants